twizzle wrote:As the average speeds increase, the 'think' time for drivers decreases and slow traffic (bicycles?) becomes more dangerous. I think this is why the 'bike bus' concept is safer as it's a bit harder to miss (fail to see) a bunch.

Tell that to the roadie bunch who had that run-in with the loser night club bouncer near the airport in Sydney

twizzle wrote:Do the conditions really exist in any of the major Australian cities (at the moment) for there to be some value in trying to mix cars and bikes?

Hi Graeme again,
This will be my last post on this, you are welcome to the last word.

Anyone who wants to, feel free to weigh in at any point)

I said:
painting lines/symbols on it doesn't make it any less "road".

You said:
It does if you drive a car. It makes it less of a road by an amount equalling precisely the width of a bike lane.

I say
Hmmm... well, i guess if you're thinking from the cars perspective?!
And if you're a car with a lot of issues around space ownership?!
What if you're thinking from a bikes perspective?
Is it less road?
Is it more road?
Is it different road?
And these my friends are the eternal questions...

I said:
"the mass must remain undisturbed for it to be effective."

You said:
"There is no validity this line of reasoning."

I say:
There is. (One of) the point(s) of CM is to ride together.
If there's 20 riders past the red light, 20 waiting at the red light and 20 more squashed between 2 lights ago and some cars*... umm, there's no point, let's just all ride separately as usual?!
*the other 20 got pissed off at the whole thing and went home.

You said:
The CM is not a sanctioned event, complete with permits and police escorts who control the traffic. It's a gathering of individuals, each of who must obey the law.

I say:
Again with the logic of "it's the law, therefore it's wrong, therefore we shouldn't do it"
why? "because it's the law, therefore it's wrong, therefore we shouldn't do it"
It's circular logic... it goes around and around justifying itself eternally.
You can read more here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

Incidentally Margaret Thatcher made a similar quote when in office
"there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women..."
(and all those individuals must obey the law of course)

You said:
"So what if cars get into the mass legally? They are allowed to do that. It's called sharing the road, which, I believe, is the reason to hold a CM in the first place."

I say:
so what? um, it sux for the riders.
a car driving into the midst of a hundred cyclists
(that, sorry, do not behave in the same way as cars, specifically speed wise)
is about as disruptive as a bike riding on a lane on the freeway...
and no i don't mean riding off to the side on the freeway, i mean in the middle of the middle lane on the freeway!
sounds fun doesn't it?!

You said:
If the whole point of the exercise is to do something which can't be done legally, then the exercise should not be held.

I say:
Yes, that's true... but only if the only parameter you have for judging wrong from right is based on "the law"

You said:
Is there some rule in the CM which says riders at the front who are separated from the main group by lights can't pull over (safely) and wait for their companions to catch up once they get through the lights (legally)? Doing so would keep the mass together without breaking any laws.

I say:
There is no rule, no.
Sounds fun too!

I said:
Let's think for a just a second "outside the double triangle [of law]" about the safety of CM riders. 100 riders are riding peacefully along. Nobody is corking any of the minor intersections along the way.
One agro car driver decides he might try to sneak his way into the mass, and, because there is no one corking, succeeds!
Now we have 100 riders with 1 agro car driver in the midst.
Sound safe?

You said:
Sounds safe to me, at least, for the 100 riders. Maybe not for the agro driver, but that's up to him to drive to conditions. Every day when I ride on the road, I'm passed by dozens to hundreds of drivers. It's extremely rarely that I feel unsafe. Why would I feel threatened by one driver when I'm with 99 other riders?

I say:
yes, but i am not really talking about the "character" of drivers per se. In fact I have many friends who are car drivers and i also don't think CM riders are a bunch of agro hot heads ready to eat the first baby of a car driver they see?!
do you?
having said that: a driver who turns onto a rode where a whole bunch of cyclists are riding, clearly together, might be of the agro variety.
And given what that driver is driving (something that weighs A LOT) i wouldn't want my machine to be pitted against their machine!
NB:
corkers are also useful for drivers who would NOT turn down the street because of agro reasons, but (perhaps?) because there is a temporary break in the mass.
We do them a favour by corking them! As, given circumstances that they aren't aware of, we are stopping them from incorrectly making a decision that they otherwise would have made differently!

Also consider that the act of corking doesn't have to be aggressive in itself!
Corkers are more than welcome to perform for the temporarily delayed cars: chat, share cake, do a dance, hand out a leaflet.
There's no need to be poo faced about it!

You said:
Please explain why 100 riders should be allowed to break the law which governs all road users alike, whether they be drivers or riders.

I say:
because (one of) the point(s) of CM is to keep the riders together.

You said:
"What would happen if I and 99 of my closest car-driving friends also wanted to hold a Critical Car Mass? It will be fun! We'll be wearing funny hats, we'll toot our horns, we'll dress our cars up and we'll all tune into one radio station so the music will get everyone who is stuck at the lights into the party mood. And to really make sure we have a party, we'll do it during peak period on a Friday! Should we be allowed to block all traffic until every one of us has made it through an intersection? If you want equality, surely we must have the same access to the disobedience of the road laws. Does that sound fair?"

I say:
yes, do it!
On my bike i can ride right through you! (if the party is not to my liking of course...)
but i would be curious to know why you were doing it so i'd hope you'd have some information available for onlookers.

You said:
Why do I use the word "terrorism"? Here's a definition of it "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons."

I say:
Good, that covers just about everything then.

use: unlawful OR threatened
perpetrators: person OR organised group
tactic: intimidation OR coercion OR violence OR force
target: societies OR governments, people OR property
motive: ideological OR political

so the CM's who are about to eat the baby would be: a threatening, (semi) organised group, using violence and force (to pry open the back door = damaging property) to eat the baby (violence again) whose motive is political? or ideological?
Oh, and by the way all of this would be highly illegal!

You said:
Sometimes, a Critical Mass ride is terrorism because people feel threatened by the actions of the participants. That's why I intentionally used the word.

I say:
So every time someone feels "threatened by the actions of someone" it's terrorism?
what a terrorised society we live in!

:time for persons and organised groups to use intimidation, force, violence and coercion to bring it all down! '

You said:
I read your post about the Torronto CM. You said the people waved from their balconies. How many people who weren't already home waved too? Getting tacit support from non-road users doesn't seem to bolster your argument that drivers are sympathetic to the cause. They aren't being inconvenienced by the traffic jam.

I say:
From my experience, some are friendly, some are not but deal with it. And very rarely someone gets quite cranky.

You said:
"I'm with you 100% in trying to get drivers to share the road (or even to simply obey the road rules ...). I'm against you 100% if you think Critical Mass is the way to do it.

I say:
I still haven't said what, if anything, i think CM will/can/does achieve.
And, if you want immediate (or even predictable) achievements in any realm... well i really don't know where to direct you.

You said:
I'm not challenging CM for the sake of challenging - I'm completely against the concept because, to do it, riders MUST break the laws they want drivers to obey (Critical Manners is a better option).

I say:
Mmmm, maybe this is getting to the crux of the matter?!
I personally don't have a big gripe with the way motorised 'users of the road' use the road.
On the whole I find them pretty courteous.
Occasionally they cut you off but i think that has to do more with their inbuilt impatience and inability to understand your pace than any deliberate intention.
And sometimes they might open their car door on your path.
etc etc
What i do have a problem with [in Brisbane] is that on many roads there is simply not adequate space for riders.
The footpath is for pedestrians, the road is for cars and the like.
Yes, bikes can go on both (actually isn't it ILLEGAL for bikes to be on footpaths?!
anyways neither option is anywhere near ideal as anyone who's tried both i'm sure will testify.

But hang on,
I just read your post again... and now i'm confused:

here you say:
"Every day when I ride on the road, I'm passed by dozens to hundreds of drivers. It's extremely rare that I feel unsafe."

but here (and elsewhere) say
I'm with you 100% in trying to get drivers to... simply obey the road rules ....

so are drivers ok? or not?
do they obey the law or not?
are you perfectly happy with the situation? or not?

is it the (alleged) law-breaking cyclists that you have a problem with?!
hmmm... food for thought no doubt.

Alright,
Thanks Graeme but it's time i said goodbye to this conversation.
You're welcome to sum it up with closing words,

MountGower wrote:Regardless of our individual personalities, as a nation we are very phlegmatic. We'll have a CM ride .......... one day.

Ba$tard - couldn't you have linked the word to a dictionary!

Do a google search for "the four temperaments"

O.K. - you got me. I can't see the connection

We are like the South Americans, Twizzle. We need a bomb up our whatsanames before we will spring in to action. Regardless of what we are like individually, "She'll be right, mate", "Do it tomorrow" etc often stop us from doing things and achieving things collectively.

twizzle wrote:Do the conditions really exist in any of the major Australian cities (at the moment) for there to be some value in trying to mix cars and bikes?

Come down to Mebourne. I do it most every day with no ill effects.

So, there are no roads where you could just merge into the lane and be treated equally without being in danger of being flattened?

'Mix' is such a vague term, but I can't think how to better define what I mean

There are roads here locally where it would be suicide to travel on unless you were able to keep up with the traffic, therefore the traffic would have to be at 'peak period' average speeds for the entire day. Mind you - it's fun pulling 50kph in the lane with the cars... but I can only do it for short periods.

MountGower wrote:Regardless of our individual personalities, as a nation we are very phlegmatic. We'll have a CM ride .......... one day.

Ba$tard - couldn't you have linked the word to a dictionary!

Do a google search for "the four temperaments"

O.K. - you got me. I can't see the connection

We are like the South Americans, Twizzle. We need a bomb up our whatsanames before we will spring in to action. Regardless of what we are like individually, "She'll be right, mate", "Do it tomorrow" etc often stop us from doing things and achieving things collectively.

O.K. - found what you meant now. I kept on getting Keirsey personality profiles....

I've covered the points I wanted to make, so I'll just answer some of the question from your last post on the topic before I too bow out.

You wrote:so are drivers ok? or not?do they obey the law or not?are you perfectly happy with the situation? or not?

I don't live in Brisbane and I don't ride a "normal bike" on the road now, so my circumstances are different to yours, but by-and-large, I'm happy with how drivers treat me. GENERALLY, they pass with enough room, they don't turn in front of me, they give way when they must: in essence I'm treated as I am in my car.

That doesn't mean I think drivers (and riders) can't be better educated in all aspects of road law. There are always a few who do stupid things, and whether I see them from my bike seat or my car seat, they exist.

As far as the roads and bike paths go: here in Perth, they are generally both pretty good. Where a road I want to use has a bike lane, I'll be in it. If the road I want to use doesn't have a lane set aside, I don't feel unsafe or threatened by traffic. I just get on with my ride, trusting the drivers to take appropriate care. Others who are less experienced might not feel the same.

From the looks of your last post Eliza, it seems your biggest gripe is that the Brisbane roads don't cater well enough for cyclists and drivers alike. You have my sympathies. I'd say that's due to the long-standing inaction of previous governments, and by implication, previous electorates.

Maybe you should move to Perth? Better roads and drivers, and better climate for riding.... At the very least, we can keep the WA forum where it belongs - on top!

Cheers,
Graeme

Think outside the double triangle.---------------------Music was better when ugly people were allowed to make it ....

The big question now is: What does CM ride in Brisbane look like? I have some ideas but it's my beddy bye time, so will think more and post up from work maybe. Hopefully Eliza will contribute further regarding that.

Mulger bill wrote:Those photos are totally unpublished, obtained from an unreliable source. What are they worth to you?

Not much - they just prove I fit in with the drivers .... I was only interested to make sure my grey beard was straight and I didn't have beer stains on my jersey. So unbecoming! I got an image to maintain, ya know!

Cheers,
Graeme

Think outside the double triangle.---------------------Music was better when ugly people were allowed to make it ....

My idea as to how these rides should go would be to leave the CBD at 4pm once a week. Probably a Wednesday. Each ride would go down a main road and back. Roads like Old Cleveland to Cleveland and back. Wynnum Rd to Wynnum or Manly and back. Waterworks Rd to the Gap and back. Sandgate Rd to Sangate and Back. Bowen Bridge, Lutwyche and Gympie Rd to Bald Hills and back. etc etc.

Road rules would need to be adhered to and it would be equally good to see rouge morons on bikes being taken out by police as it would be to see the same happen to the caged apes. Corking of intersections would be replaced by stopping and waiting.

Who is online

About the Australian Cycling Forums

The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.